• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Paul 30th August 2013 17:10:12 NY, Penfield, I strongly object to your plan 2014. Nancy Schallmo 30th August 2013 17:08:36 NY, Rochester, I am opposed to Plan 2014! Mark Schallmo 30th August 2013 17:04:14 NY, Rochester, I am opposed to Plan 2014!!! The attached picture shows what was left of my neighbor's cottage during Lake Ontario "High Water" in April of 1993 under the existing plan. The higher levels of the 2014 plan will wipe out many more of my neighbors. Attachment Rebecca M Skinner 30th August 2013 16:52:35 NY, Wolcott, I object to the proposed changes because lake level variations for property owners on Sodus Bay and other bays in the area are extreme enough already. Increased water levels will cause property damage and loss as well as economic loss for thousands of landowners across the shoreline and bays. I anticipate the loss of the protective sandbar which stands as a barrier of the brunt of Lake Ontario's might on Sodus Bay. The last time this sandbar was lost was in the 1950's before the current controls were put in place. Now it is full of homes- I fear for their loss. I sat and watched the remnants of Hurricane Sandy cross these waters: NO AMOUNT OF QUICK DRAINING WILL PREPARE FOR THESE EVENTS. Jeffrey Jerome 30th August 2013 16:16:41 VA, Winchester, This is a most unworkable plan. For the IJC to suggest the level of 248 ft.proves that they are totally out of touch and should be barred from holding their positions. We own a 70 yr. old cottage that we have moved twice now to a postage sized lot that the IJC has left us. Higher wanted levels above their own flood stage is beyond belief. I cannot understand why we are forced to write and plead almost annually for what is ours..Retire the IJC board today and place competent folks in their place. SAVE THE LAKE ! Wayne H. Knox and Victoria Visiko 30th August 2013 15:22:27 NY, Greece, We are opposed to the Lake 2014 Plan, and any plan that allows any significant rise in water levels above the current level. We bought 610 Edgemere Drive in December 2012 and understand that two flood insurance claims were made at this property during previous periods of high lake water level. Therefore, for us, the danger and damage that can be caused by high lake levels together with unpredictable storms is not imagined - it is real ! We urge the rejection of this Plan. Wayne H. Knox and Victoria Visiko Thomas Folino 30th August 2013 15:05:23 N.Y., Alexandria Bay, Implement Plan 2014 now.........before it's too late and all is lost!!! It's been too long in the coming already!!! Agnes Burlee 30th August 2013 14:45:19 NY, Wolcott, I am opposed to this 2014 plan. We have lived on Sodus Bay on the southern side of the lake for over 40 years. High water causes huge erosion problems along with damage to personal property. There does not seem to be a way to reduce the lake level fast enough to keep this from happening when the level reaches the trigger point in the plan. Even one day with high winds and high water levels could cause a tremendous amount of damage. Melissa Mance 30th August 2013 14:43:53 NY, Alden, As a long time summer resident of the St. Lawrence River and a property owner on the river, I fully support PLAN 2014. I think it is critical in restoring the health of the river and surrounding eco-systems. Water levels also are so low in the late summer that boating becomes a challenge limiting the economy of the Alexandria Bay area. Joseph A. Wellington 30th August 2013 14:25:16 Connecticut, Waterbury, The 2014 proposal appears to be focused primarily on enhancing the profits of commercial interests on and along the Saint Lawrence River, the pleasures of motor boat enthusiasts on that river and the sensitivities of environmental protection enthusiasts all at the probable expense of property owners along the lake shore, the users of pubic beaches along that shore and the protection of sensitive natural resources such as the sand dunes at the eastern end of the lake. My family has owned and enjoyed property on the eastern shore of the lake for three generations. While the water levels have varied from season to season and year to year, we have managed to coexist with the aforesaid commercial interests, boating enthusiasts and those who consider themselves to be spokesmen and women for the environment for nearly sixty years. I respectfully submit that the lake and its associated environs are not broken and that they do not need fixing by your proposed 2014 plan or otherwise as a consequence thereof. I and my my family strongly oppose your plan to manipulate the level of the lake for what appears to be the benefit of commercial and boating interests on the Saint Lawrence River and those who believe that the interests of nature should automatically trump those of humans. The furtherance of those interests always seem to be at the expense of those who live on the shore of and enjoy the lake as it is. I make the foregoing submissions as a property owner and as an U.S. attorney with twenty-five years experience in the practice of environmental law. I also look forward to learning how the involvement of the U.S. federal agencies that are necessary to the implementation of your 2014 proposal have complied with the review requirements of the U.S. National Environmental Policy Act of 1970, 42 United States Code Sections 4321 et seq. Lois Steinfeldt 30th August 2013 14:21:31 MD, Lanham, I strongly oppose Plan 2014. Using our tax money to destroy the economy of western new york state to save a muskrat is just plain wrong and affects all taxpayers in the United States. This is our money and you should have more respect for us and how hard we work for this money and not spend it on muskrats Maxine Appleby 30th August 2013 14:14:26 New York, Sodus Point, Dear IJC Commissioners, I want to first thank you for allowing many voices to be heard. You and the IJC staff did an outstanding job at the public and technical meetings and town hall conferences. I sincerely appreciate your visits to our Village. After siting through many of these meetings and participating in discussions over the last month, it has been troubling to me that so many have turned their backs on the environment. I don’t fault anyone. I believe the process of segregating stakeholders into different user groups is flawed. It drives individuals to take sides and perpetuates hostile expressions. Our environment should come first. This plan is about wetland restoration, a critical component to the health of our water system and the wildlife that inhabits within. Plan 2014, although evolved from many plans, is still one solution. It is a plan with trade-offs many do not understand and most will not accept. And, although alternatives such as man-made wetlands may not work as well as natural wetlands, the fact is since the construction of the Moses Saunders dam, Lake Ontario is no longer a natural system. Until the removal of this encumbrance Lake Ontario will never be natural. So I support finding another solution that will work. I support Ducks Unlimited use of aquatic excavators to dig under the muck and uproot the invasive plants to help native plants win out. I support the Nature Conservancy’s continued monitoring of the St. Lawrence river ecosystem and help with Adaptive Management. I am glad to see $10 million from the GM and Alcoa/Reynolds in settlements to be spent on a variety of ecological restoration projects, including restoration and/or enhancement of wetlands, stream banks, native grasslands, bird nesting and roosting habitat, fisheries and fish habitat. I support the continuation of funding to USFWS and Great Lakes Fishery Commission for fisheries restoration work. I support all work toward finding a solution that helps our environment, even if it is man-made. But I do not support the one solution you have presented, I DO NOT support Plan2014. Mary Griffith 30th August 2013 13:51:25 NY, Sodus, Please do not implement Plan 2014. I am deeply concerned not only for lakefront properties but the entire community of Sodus Bay, and for Wayne County as a whole if lake and bay properties lose value in devastating storms. The removal of 50-year protections against damaging high water on the entire south shore of Lake Ontario and its bays seems unwise, unnecessary and irresponsible. I support further study to find more equitable solutions - with a more balanced representation of stakeholders. Michael 30th August 2013 12:40:18 NY, Rochester, Who will be performing assessments of the south shore property owners break walls that will have to contend with an even more extreme version of lake level management? I did not get a call from the DEC for an assessment. Why is there no information regarding the additional cost that will be incurred with these higher lake levels?. Letting Lake Ontario rise to new extremes is simply illogical and does not mitigate the need for dredging. My south shore "residential" property that has existed for well over 100 years has gone from beach front to a carved out drop off. The prior structure on my property from 1930 is now about 30 feet into the lake.

Load more

  147

Copy Link